A multimodal analysis of compliment sequences in everyday English interactions

Tiina Keisanen and Elise Kärkkäinen

Abstract

This study offers a multimodal analysis of turns in everyday English interactions that are used for making compliments, i.e. for positively evaluating the appearance, personal qualities or actions of (a) co-present participant(s) in the present situation. We first identify the most frequent linguistic formats recurrently occurring in compliments in our data. We then focus on the sequential interactional analysis of compliment sequences, i.e. the production of the compliment and the response it receives. While a range of bodily-visual displays and prosodic features can be identified as co-constructing compliment activity, we argue that gaze direction has a specific role in the production of both compliments and their responses. The data come from a database of approximately 8 hours of video–recorded casual face-to-face conversations in English. The study employs the methodology of conversation analysis, maintaining that social interaction in face-to-face conversations is a multimodal achievement, where participants’ use of language, embodied actions and material objects are variously combined to build coherent courses of action (Goodwin 2000). The aim of the study is to provide a description of how embodied actions enter into the design of social action formats for compliments.

Keywords:
Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Bavelas, J.B., L. Coates, and T. Johnson
(2002) Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze. Journal of Communication 52: 566-580. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
(2012) On affectivity and preference in responses to rejection. In E. Kärkkäinen, and J. Du Bois (eds.), Stance, Affect, and Intersubjectivity in Interaction: Sequential and Dialogic Perspectives. Special issue of Text & Talk 32-4: 453-475.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Sandra Thompson
(2005) A linguistic practice for retracting overstatements: ‘Concessive repair’. In A. Hakulinen, and M. Selting (eds.), Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the Use of Linguistic Resources in Talk-in-Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 257-288. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Du Bois, John, and Elise Kärkkäinen
(2012) Taking a stance on emotion: Affect, sequence, and intersubjectivity in dialogic interaction. In E. Kärkkäinen, and J. Du Bois (eds.), Stance, Affect, and Intersubjectivity in Interaction: Sequential and Dialogic Perspectives. Special issue of Text & Talk 32-4: 433-451.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John, Stephan Schuetze-Coburn, Susanna Cumming, and Danae Paolino
(1993) An outline of discourse transcription. In J.A. Edwards, and M.D. Lampert (eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 45-87.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara A
(2000) Micro-syntax in conversation. Paper presented at Interactional Linguistics Conference, Spa, Belgium, September 2000.
(2007) Principles shaping grammatical practices: An exploration. Discourse Studies 9.3: 299-318. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Golato, Andrea
(2002) German compliment responses. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 547-571. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
(2000) Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 1489-1522. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles, and Marjorie Harness Goodwin
(1987) Concurrent operations on talk: Notes on the interactive organization of assessments. IPrA Papers in Pragmatics 1.1: 1-54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1992) Assessment and the construction of context. In A. Duranti, and C. Goodwin (eds.), Rethinking context. Language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 147-190.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Haddington, Pentti
(2006) The organization of gaze and assessments as resources for stance taking. Text &Talk 26.3: 281-328. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto
(2003) Joint utterance construction in Japanese converstion. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
(2002) Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In C. Ford, B.A. Fox, and S. Thompson (eds.), The Language of Turn and Sequence. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.196-224.Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
(2005) The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly 68.1: 15-38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hutchby, Ian, and Robin Wooffitt
(2008) Conversation Analysis, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Keisanen, Tiina
(2012) “Uh-oh, we were going there”: Environmentally occasioned noticings of trouble in in-car interaction. Semiotica 191.1/4: 199-224.Google Scholar
Keisanen, Tiina, and Elise Kärkkäinen
(2014) Stance. In Klaus P. Schneider, and Anne Barron (eds.), Pragmatics of Discourse. Handbook of Pragmatics [HOPS]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 295-322. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kärkkäinen, Elise, and Tiina Keisanen
(2012) Linguistic and embodied formats for making (concrete) offers. Discourse Studies 14.5: 1-25. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lindström, Anna, and Lorenza Mondada
(2009) Assessments in social interaction: Introduction to the special issue. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42.4: 299-308. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Local, John
(2004) Getting back to prior talk: And-uh(m) as a back-connecting device. In E. Couper-Kuhlen, and C. Ford (eds.), Sound patterns in interaction: Cross-linguistic studies of phonetics and prosody for conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 377-400. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Manes, Joan, and Nessa Wolfson
(1981) The compliment formula. In F. Coulmas (ed.), Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech. The Hague: Mouton Publishers, pp. 115-132.Google Scholar
Nevile, Maurice
(2004) Beyond the black box. Talk-in-Interaction in the Airline Cockpit. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
McClave, Evelyn
(2000) Linguistic functions of head movements in the context of speech. Journal of Pragmatics 32: 855-878. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
(2009) The embodied and negotiated production of assessments in instructed actions. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42.4: 329-361. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
(1978) Compliment responses. Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints. In J. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York: Academic Press, pp. 79-112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 57-101.Google Scholar
(1986) Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human Studies 9: 219-229. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rauniomaa Mirka, and Tiina Keisanen
(2012) Two multimodal formats for responding to requests. Journal of Pragmatics 44.6–7: 829-842. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rossano, Federico
(2013) Gaze in conversation. In J. Sidnell, and T. Stivers (eds.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 308-329.Google Scholar
Ruusuvuori Johanna, and Anssi Peräkylä
(2009) Facial and verbal expressions in assessing stories and topics. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42.4: 377-394. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel
(1986) On some gestures’ relation to talk. In J.M. Atkinson, and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 266-296.Google Scholar
(2007) Sequence Organization in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Scheibman, Joanne
(2001) Local patterns of subjectivity in person and verb type in American English conversation. In J. Bybee, and P. Hopper (eds.), Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 61-89. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
(1987) Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Shaw, Rebecca, and Celia Kitzinger
(2012) Compliments on a home birth helpline. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45.3: 213-244. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
(1989) Vuoronalkuiset konnektorit: Mutta . [Turn-initial connectors: But ]. In A. Hakulinen (ed.), Suomalaisen keskustelun keinoja I. Kieli 4. Helsinki: Finnish Department, University of Helsinki, pp. 162-176.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, and Frederico Rossano
(2010) Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43.1: 3-31. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen, Charles Goodwin, and Curtis LeBaron
(2011) Embodied interaction in the material world. An introduction. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, and C. LeBaron (eds.), Embodied Interaction. Language and Body in the Material World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-26.Google Scholar
Wagner, Johannes, and Rod Gardner
(2004) Introduction. In R. Gardner, and J. Wagner (eds.), Second Language Conversations. London: Continuum, pp. 1-17.Google Scholar